posted
Has anyone noticed at how the media (tv and print) keeps reporting the conflict in Sudan as racial warfare between "Arabs" and "black Africans"?
I did a search at using and found that people on both sides of the conflict were surprised at how the media (western?) were reporting on it.
The impression of caucasian (whatever that means) "arabs" vs "black africans" (again whatever that means) given by the news media seems either blatently fraudulent or dumb.
If it is done fraudulently then what else will these people lie or misinform about?
If it is stupidity then that basically says why bother even listening to them.
Posts: 76 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
^ Can you provide us with a source of what you feel is accurate information on the situation in Sudan?
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
One of the sensationalist themes encountered with respect to the conflict in Darfur is that it is a racial one in which light-skinned “Arab” tribes have been engaged in the “ethnic cleansing” of black “African” tribes. [2] These sorts of claims are particularly inflammatory and very questionable. Mahmood Mamdani, director of the Institute of African Studies at Columbia University, noted that “The implication that these are two different races, one indigenous and the other not is dangerous.” [3] The simple fact is that there is very little, if any, racial difference between the many tribes of Darfur, “Arab” or “African”. Both communities are black. The London Observer newspaper has reported, for example, that “[c]enturies of intermarriage has rendered the two groups physically indistinguishable”.[4] The UN media service noted: “In Darfur, where the vast majority of people are Muslim and Arabic-speaking, the distinction between ‘Arab’ and ‘African’ is more cultural than racial.”[5] This reality has also been confirmed by Dr Alex de Waal and other anti-government activists.[6] Ryle has noted that Arabs and non-Arabs “are generally physically indistinguishable”. [7] The New York Times has exemplified contradictory reporting on this issue, with articles on one hand by their columnist Nicholas Kristof alleging, for example, that “black Africans have been driven from their homes by lighter-skinned Arabs in the Janjaweed” [8] while also publishing subsequent articles such as “In Sudan, No Clear Difference Between Arab and African”. [9] Even “African” Darfurian anti-government figures such as Dr Eltigani Ateem Seisi contradict the dangerously lazy shorthand of the New York Times. Speaking at a conference in Brussels he stated with reference to “Arabs” and “Africans” in Darfur that “we all look alike” and that one “can’t tell from the features if he is Arab or African”. He added that he, an “African”, had a lighter skin than many “Arabs”. [10]
Dr de Waal is one of the few recognised experts on Sudan, albeit from a clearly antigovernment perspective. [11] Described by The Observer newspaper of London as a “world authority on the country”, de Waal is a human rights advocate who has published widely on Sudan. He has also previously worked in Darfur. He has pointedly challenged the “Arab” versus “African” stereotype, stating that “Characterizing the Darfur war as ‘Arabs’ versus ‘Africans’ obscures the reality. Darfur’s Arabs are black, indigenous, African Muslims – just like Darfur’s non-Arabs.” [12] He has also said:
We will see that the story is not as simple as the conventional rendering in the news, which depicts a conflict between ‘Arabs’ and ‘Africans.’ The Zaghawa…are certainly indigenous, black and African: they share distant origins with the Berbers of Morocco and other ancient Saharan peoples. But the name of the ‘Bedeyat’, the Zaghawa’s close kin, should alert us to their true origins: pluralize in the more traditional manner and we have ‘Bedeyiin’ or Bedouins. Similarly, the Zaghawa’s adversaries in this war, the Darfurian Arabs, are ‘Arabs’ in the ancient sense of ‘Bedouin,’ meaning desert nomad…Darfurian Arabs, too, are indigenous, black, and African. In fact there are no discernible racial or religious differences between the two: all have lived there for centuries. [13]
Posts: 76 | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:The simple fact is that there is very little, if any, racial difference between the many tribes of Darfur, “Arab” or “African”. Both communities are black.
I agree with this statement. But it seems to me to be in denial of the fact that the Sudanese government does not regard it this way. That is what is important.
So the disclaimer of the ethnically motivated fighting in Sudan is like someone saying that NAZI Germany was not racist because there is very little racial difference between Germans and Jews.
It's non-sequitur because the racism lies in the policies of the government and the motivation of the Janjaweed, which is relevant - not in some external documentation of racial diferences, which is irrelevant.
Here's the answer that would be on point and convincing: Let us hear the Sudanese government tell us that Sudan is a Black African country. Let's hear the Janjaweed tell us how Black they are. I don't want to hear what anyone else thinks. They're not the ones doing the killing and raping.
Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:the Darfurian Arabs, are ‘Arabs’ in the ancient sense of ‘Bedouin,’ meaning desert nomad…
Of course - the issue is partly that many people in Sudan are *NOT* Arabs and do not want to be Arabs, this fact which the author is trying to hide, conflicts with the *RACIST* policy of Arabisation of Sudan's government.
And the attempt to redefine Arab as anyone living a desert nomad lifestyle [Mongolians, Berber, Fulani, Masai, Afghan, Iranians, Texas cowboys] so as to bolster the number of "arabs" and so justify ethnic clensing - is just pathetic.
That article is itself cheap propaganda and very unintelligent and so earns our contempt. We're not stupid. Posts: 15202 | Registered: Jun 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
The idea of the Arab north Sudan vs. a ''black'' African southern Sudan is a product of Western Orientalists. A false notion that can easily be debunked by casual observance of most northern Sudanese. The problem is that many northern Sudanese claim predominant ''Arab'' ancestry because of a distant Arab ancestor. The Sudanese themselves have different color names to refer to themselves and none of them reference black. The issue also is a matter of prestige for claiming Arab ancestry gets you much further in their society than claiming to be African. The problem is both Western division and Arabization.
This article might be somewhat biased but relates the false Arab idenity in modern northern Sudan and also touches upon the colorism present in the country.
posted
^ Good article. Perhaps the most perceptive I've read on ths subject.
quote: Ironically, this exaggerated pride in Arabism stems from a deeper inferiority complex associated with the African connection. In the words of Mansour Khalid, “The reason [for northern identification with Arabism] stems from an inferiority complex really. The Northern Sudanese is torn internally in his Arab-African personality. As a result of his Arabic Islamic cultural development, he views himself in a higher status from other Sudanese not exposed to this process. Arabism gives him his sense of pride and distinction and that is why he exaggerates when he professes it. He becomes more royal than the King, so to speak.”
quote:Al-Baqir al-Afifi Mukhtar has also argued that Northerners’ marginal identity explains their overemphasis on Arab descent. “Statements such as ‘I am an Arab. I have genealogy’, or ‘I am an Arab, nationally and culturally, whether you like it or not’, are repeatedly issued by the political and cultural entrepreneurs. Unlike the elite of the Arab world, who do not need to state the obvious, Northerners feel the need to complement their lack in features by words.”17 Here too, the Sudanese “Arabs” confront a serious dilemma and therefore a personal crisis of identity. Since the Arabs who came to the Sudan were mostly men who married into African Sudanese families, the psychosocial implications of parental schism and implicit antagonism raise vexing questions. Al Baqir Mukhtar writes: “Northerners live in a split world. While they believe that they are the descendants of an ‘Arab father’ and an ‘African mother’, they seem to identify with the father, albeit invisible, and despise the mother who is so visible in their features. There is an internal fissure in the Northern self between the looks and the outlook, the body and the mind, the skin color and the culture, and in one word, between the ‘mother’ and the ‘father’ ... a misfit”.
Anyone recall and ES discussant named Amr1, and his ethnic distinctions based on 'soft hair'????
quote: Failing to comply with the standard color, as is the case with most of the Northerners, the individual seeks a second resort in the hair, in order to prove his or her Arab identity; the softer the hair the closer the individual to the center.”
posted
^^ Props to Rasol for his replies to that article on Darfur! Of course everyone knows that there little to no 'racial' difference between the Janjaweed nomads and the Darfurian farmers, everyone except the Janjaweed and northern Sudanese who claim to be Arab!
Rasol's analogy with Jews and Germans is perfect because Jews ARE Germans yet the non-Jewish German population, especially the Nazis refuse to acknowledge this.
Unfortunately this Arab-wannabe brainwashing is why there are northern Sudanese people like AMR1 who degrades anything 'pure' African and claims to be a "mixed-race" supremacist i.e. Nile Valley civilization was created by Africans only when they 'mixed' with people from the Near East, because pure Africans are incapable of such a thing!!
Yes this mindset is very sick as evidenced by such claims as 'soft hair' ironically Africans vary in hair texture but it is a convenient means of claiming mixed-Arab ancestry.
It's sad but I read in an article once that many northern Sudanese would rather call themselves green than black!!
The insanity keeps going when the very people of northern Sudan who consider Africans inferior are the direct descendants themseves of African civilizations that existed before there even were a people who called themselves 'Arab'!!
Posts: 26253 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Do we have a hint of this(the topic) in the West where blondism has been hiorically associated with the "superiority" of Northern European physical type. Terms like "Teutonic", "Nordic", "Blond God" do carry a certain signification in modern Europe even after the intra-European racial pecking order--from Mediterranean to Nordic. Maybe even the Western idea of the "dumb blond" was a kind of non-Nordic reaction to the preference for Nordic traits--especially for women--that are still prevalent in the West. So we have this great chain of Aesthetic being extending from the physical traits found in Africa to the traits of Nordic Europeans.
And those who have done the research have noted that Arabs with wealth(Saudis) are obsessed with blond Scandinavian women--as evidenced by the huge sums of money paid to hired concubines for their friendship.
The Arabised Sudan is also interesting because while the Sudan is very close geographically to Saudi Arabia hence the schizophrenia concerning identity, the Arabised Berbers of North Africa do not seem to be equally confused only because their general phenotype is closer to the populations of the Arab populations of West Asia. Matters are made easier for t hem in terms of "Arab identity" because a dominant Western geopolitics of the West have linked North Africa with the so-called Middle East as they truncate Africa into the constructs of "sub-Saharan Africa" and "North Africa and the Middle East".
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually many North African Berber vehemently resent being confused with Arabs.
It is a persistent and for Arabization polemacists - self serving myth, that Berber, Iranians and Afghans etc. all want to be, or consider themselves to be - Arabs.
Here's one look at this conflict, in Morocco:
More than 40 years after independence (from France), the government still doesn't want to teach the Berber language and preserve or promote the culture," says Ahmed Lachgar Agwilal, a Moroccan-born San Franciscan who is a representative of the Amazigh (Berber) Commission for Development and Human Rights in America.
"If you want to be Moroccan," he says, "you have to speak this language."
The government disagrees.
"Arabic is the official language of our identity, our Koran and our nation. The Moroccan citizen is duty-bound to speak his national language." says Khalid Shebal of the government's Institute for Arabization.
At the police registries where Moroccans go to officially designate their childrens' names, non-Arab names like Jurgurtha and Messina - the names of ancient Berber kings - are blacklisted. Only Arabic names like Hassan and Ahmed are allowed.
"To Berber militants, this is a case of trying to completely eradicate any Berber heritage," Jalali Saib, a leading activist who teaches at Rabat University, told the BBC earlier this year.
The first language of most Moroccans is some form of Berber, generally called Tamazight, though there are a number of variants. But the constitution recognizes only Arabic as the official language.
Arabic was imposed on the Berbers by the Muslims who conquered Morocco in waves of invasions beginning in the 7th century. Its influence waned a bit during the French colonial period, but after Morocco gained its independence in 1956, it surged again. In the 1970s, the government launched a campaign to impose stricter standards for the use of Arabic in place of French in government and education.
Today, Berber activists say the "Arabization" of Morocco has led to discrimination and has marginalized their people. But the government has resisted calls for recognition of Tamazight as an official language of Morocco, fearing that the crusade will spawn a separatist movement.
LOL ^^I just now realized that the above article Ausar posted was the one I was talking about!!
This is serious guys! These people are definitely suffering from serious psychological problems for them to rather call themselves 'green' than black!!
Posts: 26253 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I remember several fine efforts of Africans both at home and abroad to establish African point of view journalism on international levels.
Negro Digest/Black World African Mirror Talking Drum Afrique Histoire US African Mwalimu
One was shut down, the others received minimal to no support from the targetted readership: Afrikans interested in African related news and associated topics free of or minimally effected by non-African bias.
Who gives their subscription money to print media originating out of any continental African countries that's published, edited, and written by indigenous Africans?
Barring that, who follows online news services fitting the above criteria?
"THE MEDIA" exists because of financial support and continued perusal from its userbase. Which media do you contribute to and rely on and thus support? Complaining is easy. Harambee seems the farthest thing from the collective. I guess its expected that the "others" should do the work of reporting on African matters in an African manner. Not in the world of reality where each sees to their own self interest.
posted
LAck of historical context is the norm in the American media where few people know history so that problem always exist. It is from this that all ignorance comes. You repeat something enough time and most people will swall it-hook, line and sinker despite the visual evidence that is evident. The Arab lagacy/African presence has a similar presence in Latin AMerica based on the Spaniard paternity and the Indian (native American or African mother).
It is rare to find in Latinos (the many) who exalt the mother in all her glory and the one who gave her values to the community while gloriying the pillaging, rape and destruction of the foreigner (Spaniard usually) or Portuguese (Brazil)!
la lucha continua!
Posts: 1290 | From: usa | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
^^ Yes well it seems the northern Sudanese are taking it to a whole nother level!
For them to view their own African ancestry and heritage with such utter contempt despite the actual significance of it to human history is so mind boggling and ridiculous!
Posts: 26253 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
With regards to media reporting, and its servitude to folks who help finance it, it has to be kept in mind that, large TV networks in most nations are sponsored by cabals of social elites, particularly in the form of big business. As such, "Western" media is going to report in the interests of these elements foremost; all else, is secondary, including the immediate concerns of ordinary and working class "citizens". Independent media sponsored by the average folks are out there [and growing, particularly over the internet], but not surprisingly, still eclipsed by large [mainly corporate-funded] news outlets, considering the great gap in financial backing. Needless to say, the "manufacturing" of public opinion in both internal and global issues through these large media outlets, has been a central tool of big business and their political allies within state administrations in ensuring that the realization of their interests is sustained, and placed before those of anyone else.
Posts: 5964 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
^^I just now realized that the above article Ausar posted was the one I was talking about!!
Printer-friendly view of this topic